Search

Notices
Aviation Technology New, advanced, and future aviation technology discussion

Climategate

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 07-31-2018 | 06:05 PM
  #191  
Disinterested Third Party
 
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,758
Likes: 74
Default

Originally Posted by tomgoodman
The only good thing about resurrecting this 7 year old thread is that new readers will be exposed to the wit and wisdom of our late friend, Jungle.
That took me by surprise. I didn't look at the dates, just clicked back a few pages and there he was posting...then I looked at the date. Sad.
Reply
Old 07-31-2018 | 06:31 PM
  #192  
:-)
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,339
Likes: 1
Default

Originally Posted by rickair7777
Yes that was of course to be expected, whether the science was right or wrong. Doesn't justify resorting to the same tactics.

Too many scientists abandoned accepted principles, destroying their own and others credibility, setting back their own cause. Like I said I'm not getting this from anyone's PR, this is from friends and close relatives (I have many in academia, all hard science types).
The reason they destroyed their credibility is because they tried to pin climate change on CO2, and it simply isn't true. The rise in temperatures is clearly linked to other industrial gases, such as sulfur hexafluoride, as well as any hydrofluorocarbon really. This is why the climate models with a CO2 bias failed so miserably.



The irony here is that it's not your car that is raising temperatures, it's the manufacturing of your solar panels that is.

Pretty much most of the climate change gases comes from China.
Reply
Old 07-31-2018 | 07:30 PM
  #193  
JamesNoBrakes's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,170
Likes: 97
From: Volleyball Player
Default

Originally Posted by rickair7777
They probably would have made more progress faster if they hadn't pushed the boundaries so hard and rushed to promote their ideas, but even a broken clock is right twice a day. I've even been involved in DoD climate change mitigation planning. It's happening.
i'm not sure that's fair, if you look at anything, medical field, general science, technology, etc., you will always find people on the fringes that are either totally wrong, or faking something. Really, you'll get the entire spectrum of the sample size is large enough. The question IMO is if those people are or were given more "due" than they are owed. Is it simply confirmation bias once a few people heard "what they wanted to hear" and then simply ignored the overwhelming majority? It also makes for a great story no matter what, that there is someone or something out there that is questioning the status quo. It's an even better story when they turn out to be right, but for sheer sensationalism, these people on the fringes will likely be "magnified" in media and other realms.

It's similar to space-program/moon lander deniers. How many of these hold an aerospace engineering degree? Do you need a degree to know whether or not we went to the moon? No, I think I can trust the majority of aerospace engineers to be telling us that the science and math is correct. I know and have talked to plenty of climatologists and meteorologists and the notion that these people are getting huge payoffs as part of some huge conspiracy is ridiculous, but again, some of these things make for fantastic stories and real life is usually much more dull.
Reply
Old 07-31-2018 | 07:31 PM
  #194  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Mesabah
The reason they destroyed their credibility is because they tried to pin climate change on CO2, and it simply isn't true.
Egads. What do all these experts and scientists know? Have you published yet?
Reply
Old 07-31-2018 | 08:23 PM
  #195  
:-)
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,339
Likes: 1
Default

Originally Posted by Flytolive
Egads. What do all these experts and scientists know? Have you published yet?
I haven't tried to get into the journals, that's not my profession, but I know from friends that the publishing process has become almost entirely political these days. That's how you wind up with articles on the 36 genders.

Show me one climate model with a CO2 bias that has been remotely correct, you simply can't. We are not arguing about whether or not CC is real, or man made. The models suggested the ice caps would have already melted, they were not correct, even though the predicted amounts of CO2 in the atmosphere are correct. There is even debate in the scientific community over the black body emission properties of CO2(Stefan-Boltzmann)
Reply
Old 08-01-2018 | 05:35 AM
  #196  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Mesabah
The models suggested the ice caps would have already melted
No they didn't. Obviously the global climate is an immensely complicated system. The specific effects are difficult to predict with precision, but the overall story was predicted and in some cases underestimated. Climate change is real, serious, man-made and CO2 is the primary green house gas. Those are not in dispute.
Reply
Old 08-01-2018 | 06:47 AM
  #197  
RhinoPherret's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,026
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Flytolive
No they didn't. Obviously the global climate is an immensely complicated system. The specific effects are difficult to predict with precision, but the overall story was predicted and in some cases underestimated. Climate change is real, serious, man-made and CO2 is the primary green house gas. Those are not in dispute.
Well folks, its been settled and set in stone right here. No use studying or debating this topic any further then.
Now. Back to a truly more important issue; debating whether to wait for FA's in the ride van or not.
Reply
Old 08-01-2018 | 11:12 AM
  #198  
:-)
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,339
Likes: 1
Default

Originally Posted by Flytolive
No they didn't. Obviously the global climate is an immensely complicated system. The specific effects are difficult to predict with precision, but the overall story was predicted and in some cases underestimated. Climate change is real, serious, man-made and CO2 is the primary green house gas. Those are not in dispute.
Actually, water vapor is the primary GHG, and the temperature/CO2 relationship is in dispute. Also, look at the chart I posted above, every single model predicted the temperature would be much higher today than it is.



Even if CO2 were the primary GHG, the main source of pollution would be bunker oil used in China, especially shipping, yet that source of GHGs was excluded from the Paris accords. Why does the left always target the US right wing as the main source of CC obstructionism, while they ignore, and put in policies that allow China to continue on this path. It's 100% political, it's a disgrace.

It's time to implement major environmental tariffs on these countries, you kill two birds with one stone here, stopping their emissions, and correcting trade imbalances. I have spoken to Republican leadership about this as the next logical step in the trade war.
Reply
Old 08-01-2018 | 12:22 PM
  #199  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 5,816
Likes: 5
From: retired 767(dl)
Default

Originally Posted by Flytolive
No they didn't. Obviously the global climate is an immensely complicated system. The specific effects are difficult to predict with precision, but the overall story was predicted and in some cases underestimated. Climate change is real, serious, man-made and CO2 is the primary green house gas. Those are not in dispute.
Have you thought about breathing less.....
Reply
Old 08-01-2018 | 07:29 PM
  #200  
tomgoodman's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 6,248
Likes: 0
From: 767A (Ret)
Default

Originally Posted by badflaps
Have you thought about breathing less.....
Revenge of the cows! We’re doomed!

https://www.popsci.com/cow-farts-are...han-we-thought
Reply

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices